Support (Read Only) > Help

Clarification of rules regarding killing out of suspicion

<< < (3/9) > >>

Tezuni:
This is all IMO.

You should not kill someone unless:
1. You see them kill/attack someone and flee the scene without ID'ing.
2. They kill an innocent.
2. They are attacking a crowd.
3. You have DNA evidence.
4. Every other hard-evidence based scenario not listed here


Otherwise,
An arbitrary type of suspicion can be conjured up such as "oh, he was standing in a doorway and I suspected he killed someone inside" (happened to me today on TTT).   
When you kill without hard evidence, on a whim or suspicion, you not not just risking your own karma.  The victim may retaliate and kill you first, losing their karma in the process.

TTT isn't meant to be shoot first and hope you guessed right, you should have to find evidence before you kill, and use suspicion to guide who you pay special attention to.

ursus:

--- Quote from: Tezuni on October 01, 2015, 01:33:10 AM ---When you kill without hard evidence, on a whim or suspicion, you not not just risking your own karma.  The victim may retaliate and kill you first, losing their karma in the process.

--- End quote ---

I know of a way to fix this, but I'm going to suggest it in a separate thread so I don't derail.

Deathie:

--- Quote from: Tezuni on October 01, 2015, 01:33:10 AM ---You should not kill someone unless:
1. You see them kill/attack someone and flee the scene without ID'ing.
2. They kill an innocent.
2. They are attacking a crowd.
3. You have DNA evidence.
4. Every other hard-evidence based scenario not listed here

--- End quote ---

It's great to have a code of ethics, but if everyone followed your code, then it wouldn't even be a game anymore. It'd be just like playing CSGO with bots that stare back at you as you senselessly murder their comrades.

Posing "you can only kill with hard evidence" as a rule is incredibly restrictive, and removes any pressure or skill needed from traitors.

Like, I'm not even trying to defend being innocent and killing for a shitty reason. I love my T rounds because there's a thrill from knowing that you can be cornered at any moment, for any reason. You have to be meticulous in covering your tracks since any sliver of doubt can put you at risk.

The game isn't "wait for the police to arrive, thoroughly investigate the scene, and determine the culprit after a thorough DNA analysis, cross reference fingerprints, interviews, and six weeks of paperwork". It's "And Then There Were None" with a wacky tone. You're on a time limit to stop the culprit(s) before you're killed.

Prox:
If you're alone and you see someone coming at you in such manner that you feel like they're about to kill you then it's perfectly fine to begin shooting them although I believe that it goes without saying that you should inform that player that you don't want him to approach you.

The rule list for TTT was made some over four years ago with combined efforts of mine and community. Since then many people were able to make changes to it and right now looking at the rule #3 I do not entirely agree with that because in some cases (like the one I've mentioned above) you can be pretty sure who the traitor is without him "doing anything". However that shouldn't be confused with just merely being suspicious to a certain degree since this gamemode has tag function for that sort of reason.

Tiger Guy:
The problem is that everyone's "good reasons" to kill a suspected traitor is different. Someone who plays more textbook TTT may only kill someone if they see them shooting someone else without reason or if multiple people have called them a T and then died.

Some people, like me, play a style of TTT that is highly based on intuition. Sometimes I just know that someone's a traitor. That doesn't mean I KOS them immediately, but it means that I'm more willing to shoot them if they do traitorious things. It's a very high-risk/high-reward style of playing TTT and I enjoy playing like that, since it still puts me on the edge after 5 years of playing TTT.

As you may assume, I don't really have a problem with how ursus plays. It's a very on the edge playstyle, opposed to playing the good boy innocent. If ursus fucks up and kills an inno, their karma will go down and say "you should probably think more before you shoot someone on suspicion, ya dingus!". If ursus kills you on suspicion and it turns out you're a traitor, tough shit man. Even if YOU think you did nothing wrong, ursus's anecdotal evidence may prove that you have a 90% chance of being a traitor and kill you before you kill anyone else.

It may be bullshit that you get shot by someone for what you think is not enough evidence, but it adds more variety to TTT. If ursus's and my playstyle was deemed banable, it would remove a lot of fun out of TTT and make it the utimate Good Cop game.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page